I would like to take the time to point out both of their source materials so we can all appreciate the contrast between both kinds of crazy we have in this thread.

_________________
this sig is my fanboy badge of HONOR!!!1!

Now, I'm going to be frank, I'm biased against Palestine just because of their religion, even though I should know better. That being said, I think Israel came out in the 1940's - 1950's out of nowhere to solve a problem that did need addressing, but it still didn't work out quite as well. It'd be cool if they could just get together anyway, become a single entity (thus fixing the land thing), and forget about religion, but this is the middle east we're talking about here.

_________________
One time when I was high, I thought I was in an ambulance dying. Turns out I was just eating sherbert.
-stufflikehearts-

So, like, on one hand an analytical Right-Wing site dedicated to keeping track of Left-Wing politics through logic, facts, research, and investigative journalism; and a vulgar display of hypocritical anti-military slurs and defamatory language based entirely on emotion on the other.

I appreciate the contrast you have drawn.

By the way, Sentios? I recall when Liberals in my high school would bash the military for their participation in the Iraq war. And yet those same people were the ones who tried to get petitions signed for military action against the atrocities in Darfur. You sound like the exact same kind of person, decrying the military when it suits him and then demanding it other times. I want to know honestly where you stood at the moment you saw the footage from 9/11, the airplanes crashing into the Twin Towers and what thoughts were going through your head. I really doubt you were thinking anything like "We had better not start a war over this."

Of course, if I'm wrong, please enlighten me.

_________________

Lol, solve what issue?

Israel is a state that was impressed upon the Middle East because, honestly speaking, the Great Powers don't have the time to make Jews a part of their own communities, so they'll shove it into some protectorate by force because having a problem within your own region's a bitch.

And hey, Jerusalem happens to be there, why not. SCORE ONE FOR GREAT BRITAIN.

It's hardly about religion these days, anyways. The Israeli-Palestine conflict is one entirely one of "this is the land we've lived on forever!" vs. "history tells us our ancestors were here before you guys chased us out in the past!"

And "This was our land!" vs. "We were the ones that made it good now!"

Etc.

It's all about power and all about nationalism. The spiritual question's a sideshow of a sideshow nowadays. Israel wants uncontested power in its realm and Palestinians want their homeland and a nation.

It's one of those things with no right answer and one caused almost entirely because of retarded Europeans drawing lines in places without any real foresight or care.

You know, like the entirety of Africa.

_________________
Twitter | Transistor Glamor | Tumblr | MAL

I posted a link on Israel's right to exist earlier. It actually clarifies what you're talking about here. You're about 3/4 right in what you're saying but there's some stuff you might have forgotten or maybe didn't know. Here's the link again: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/view ... .asp?id=38

_________________

I see that I've rustled your jimmies.



Don't compare me to US Liberals, on their best days they're slightly less crazy conservatives. I've yet to support any part of this crusade in the middle east.



A start would be leveling that damn mountain, just evacuate Jerusalem and drop bunker busters on it until there's no more reason to argue over about it even as a show.

Newsflash: UN is also codeword for meddling white people lolol.

lololololol

It's totally irrelevant that the modern "Palestine" did not exist under the Ottoman Empire, in the same sense that the Ukraine having been a part of Imperial or Soviet Russa has no meaning in whether its inhabitants have a right to self-determination, in the same way that Tibet having been a part of the Qing Empire has no bearing on whether the PRC government has rights to lay claim to it.

I don't see what the area having been a part of the Ottoman Empire gives ANY power, especially ones not even in the region! any rights to determine whether they can parachute a chunk of Israelites into the region because their populations are anti-Semites and it's better to just shove them off somewhere else (to the point that the Jews were so incensed by European and Anglo-Saxon bigotry that they themselves pleaded to be parachuted somewhere!)

The creation of Israel didn't even start with the UN anyways. It began after WWI as a British effort. The UN didn't even exist yet! As a part of the Balfour Declaration et al, they mass immigrated a ton of Jews into the areas because that's what they felt like doing. The local inhabitants had no real choice in the matter considering the British would've just blown them up if they resisted.

Of course, by the end of WWII, Britain was a spent power. They had no patience for Imperialism, there was too much to fix back home that this random pet project was too much trouble. So they threw the problem at the UN and ran laughing into the night.

Then at that time, all things considered, the UN decided, "Well, okay. Everyone in the what used to be the Ottoman Empire and then were British protectorates can have the right of self determination, as outlined in the UN principles, and we'll carve out nations like that accordingly.

Uh.

Except you guys over here. Cause that's where a bunch of Jews are... and, uh, we were all dicks to them and they had a pretty rough time, you know? So, you guys can make it up to them for us. Deal? Oh, haha, I forget, you don't need to agree. Here's your receipt, you don't need to sign."

My favorite part about that link you gave is how it's specifically edited to use words that throws animosity and savagery as qualities of the Arab alliance and tries to white wash as much Israel responsibility of the whole matter. It's really funny.

Not saying Israel shouldn't exist. The problem has gone way beyond any clear cut solution or obvious moral answer. It's just a fucking retard party now.

Also, you might not know, but the beloved "state of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza" that the article says they would've had IF ONLY the mean Arab dictators didn't attack a POOR Israel BEGGING for peace! would have looked like this:


Try thinking of living in either of those retard formed states! There's an obvious reason why Israel refuses to hand over the occupied territories it gained in the ensuing war, they're the lands that actually make Israel a continguous state!

The UN settlement was hilariously dumb. But it isn't really the UN's fault either, it's just proof of how retardedly unsolvable the issue was ALREADY. And hey, guess what? It was a mess created entirely because Britain, as a leader of Europe, really didn't want to deal with Jews anymore, and by that token, the Jews really didn't wanna deal with the Europeans anymore.

So, you know, let's just shove them over here in this fallen Empire. We're strong, we're a great power. No problem, right?

_________________
Twitter | Transistor Glamor | Tumblr | MAL

Some thesises from that website: all Palestinians are terrorists, left wing politicians are in league with Islam to promote jihad; and, in an article tempered by some of the greatest sampling bias I has ever seen, the negroes, gays, muslims, and movie stars are all actively campaigning to defame white Christians and any portrayal of a Christian in media is infused by liberal Christian-hate.

_________________
this sig is my fanboy badge of HONOR!!!1!

It is absolutely relevant. The land was owned by the Ottomans, and when they fell the land was basically up for grabs. Everyone there was an Arabian immigrant who all came from different countries; Palestine was the region, not the country, and no one at that time really considered themselves "Palestinian."

This is a map of the United Kingdom of Israel circa 1020 BCE:


Consider that this was over 3000 years ago. Since then the land has changed hands many times, and has been controlled by Ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Ancient Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, the Sunni Arab Caliphate, the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, Crusaders, Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottomans, the British and modern Israelis and Palestinians (Wikipedia).

The British took control of the land after promising a large part of the land to the Arabs in exchange for their support against the Ottomans, and also to the Jewish for their support. Of course, these were conflicting promises as I'm sure the Arab leaders and the Jewish people probably expected to rule almost exclusively over the land.

It wasn't so much that the Ottoman Empire itself had any sway in how the land was divided, nor is that what the above article is trying to say.

I believe it was more of an arbitrary decision (as a peacekeeping effort), though both parties may have been promised to the same land. It seems as though the decision to give Israel the capitol of Jerusalem, the Holy City, was met with anger for entirely religious reasons, which would make sense, considering the resulting wars against Israel.

With all due respect, you're wrong. The League of Nations was replaced by the United Nations in 1945. The League of Nations failed in the purpose of their organization--which was to prevent wars between nations--and so the UN basically took over.

Unfortunately, like most things that involve a lot of people with conflicting self-interests, it really didn't work too well, as we know now.

True, the British could have done that, but they ended up not doing that, even after the eight Arab states tried to destroy Israel. No one really tried to help Israel when attacked by eight countries almost simultaneously. Israel had no choice but to defend itself or risk annihilation.

Remind me why we have a disagreement about this? I really have no clue.

I love the image that brings to mind, by the way.A bit revisionist... but that's essentially how it happened, I suppose.

I don't see the humor. Especially when even a quick search through Wikipedia seems to verify all the article's claims.

It may very well be. However, my solution would be for the United States to publicly announce its support of Israel. If anything, Israel deserves more support than we give all their enemies combined. In my opinion, we should let Israel carry out whatever pre-emptive strikes it believes are necessary against its aggressors, with full support from the United States.

If peace had resulted from Israel's attempts at peace with the surrounding (violent) Arab nations who soon swore to redeem Palestine "in fire and blood" (and no, the author of that article didn't make that up), then yes they would have a very peaceful state, with prosperous people who enjoy more freedoms and a better way of life as a result. But that's not what happened, obviously, and as recently as last year, Israel has still been trying to make peace with its neighbors, but can't because the surrounding nations refuse to recognize it. PA Chairman Abbas even presented a map where all of Israel is erased, and had it publicly displayed.

And the author of that article didn't make up how the Islamists call the failure to destroy Israel upon its founding "The Catastrophe" either. Even if that wasn't what they called it then, it's what they call it now.

_________________

Not quite; I'm used to anti-military rhetoric (we have a lot of it, mainly from strong Left-Wingers who like to think of themselves as civil, tolerant intellectuals). I just find the fact that you used that image very telling.

If you intended to use the image in a way other than how I described it above, you failed.

No more crazy than decrying the military when it suits you and then demanding its aid later, buddy.

By the way, I assumed earlier that you were from the United States. From what I gather now, you're not. My apologies for assuming wrongly. May I ask where you are from?

Yeah, it sucks. But if you live in Europe and you don't do anything to act against injustice, aren't you part of the problem? Or does the fear of reprisals from the government just run too deep?

How would you go about doing that? I thought you were against military action?

_________________

See there's that famous denial. The idea it expresses is correct, soldiers are paid exceedingly well for rarely if ever produce anything of value to the citizenry of the nation. You say you're protecting us? From nations that wouldn't rely on a conventionally structured military to if they were serious about fighting us begin with? I think we tried that in Nam and lost.



That's about the reading comprehension I expected of you, I am from the US and can't wait to leave I simply don't identify with what this country calls liberal. The day I need the military to protect me is the day I need to die anyways.



That wasn't me but two wrongs don't make a right.



Contract a demolitions company?

Well, I have no real patience for talking to a brick wall, so whatever. You can blindly support the propaganda proliferated throughout your country due to the real politik reality that Israel needs a blank check of support from the US for US to retain them as a reliable ally in the Middle East. It's not really an issue, I wouldn't say US should do anything different. It's just annoying when people are ignorant due to the machinations of the government.

It's definitely in the US's best national interest to continue supporting Israel. Well, in the short term.

It's pretty sad the USSR fell when it did, actually. Some real progress was being made because both sides were pressured by their respective client states to work something out, because neither power wanted a nuclear war over something as dumb as Israel.

But, you know, things don't always work out nice. And it sure benefited a lot of other people, theoretically, to see the USSR fall. Well, kinda.

btw under the original UN borders, Jerusalem would've been a free city, run by the UN. It wasn't given until Israel until it took it by force during the war, like much of the territory it occupies now.

_________________
Twitter | Transistor Glamor | Tumblr | MAL

I'm working on a post right now, but...

Israel took Jerusalem by force? I never heard about that, but perhaps I just haven't read deeply enough into the history. Do you have an article I can peruse?

_________________

You persist in saying I was upset by the image?

See, I don't get upset by ridiculous, childish name-calling or public slander. I don't even get upset by "Yo mama" jokes. I never have, even when I was a kid. You'll notice there's a difference between the way I'm talking now and the way I was talking about the outrage of you calling Israel our "most worthless ally." Then, I was upset. Now I am not. I merely pointed out that your image was a vulgar, hypocritical display of self-satisfying hatred of a people you haven't tried to understand or even tolerate. You think of us as a waste on the economy (despite the fact that the military is a government expenditure and you apparently like government expenditure when it directly benefits you and not when it doesn't, so you are in fact a bold-faced hypocrite) and I can live with that.

What I can't understand is why you slander a people you have not tried to even understand, and you somehow think that the way you talk about them is justified. Do you realize that for all your anti-military rhetoric, if it came down to it, every member of the armed forces would do everything in their power to keep you and anyone else from harm?

This sentiment might be wasted on you, but you should know that it's true.

The very fact that we haven't had a coordinated military strike on America since WW2 is due to the military, either directly or indirectly.

For example, there are two primary ways to prevent crime: One is to have armed, patroling police officers; this is an active deterrent. Another is to ensure that everyone in your neighborhood owns a gun and knows how to use it; this is a passive deterrent. In the first case, you're trying to stop crime before it happens. In the second case, should a crime occur, the victims can reasonably be expected to defend themselves and ward off an attacker.

America is like a home-owner with a bazooka. Our military is one of the strongest in the world, and poses a serious threat to any nation that would dare attack us. It's like our Union Jack--the snake with the phrase "Don't Tread On Me" on it.

By the way, we were winning the war in Vietnam since about midway through it, but due to the steady rise of anti-war sentiment over the years, politicians wanted to cut their losses and appease people by bringing the troops home (politics, am I right?). As the troops left Vietnam, war broke out again, even as it had been beginning to die down on both sides. We ended up losing that war because people in our country saw the realities of what war is, and couldn't reconcile it to how they thought it was. We became defeatist even as the war began to turn in our favor.

Ah, I see. When you said "Don't compare me to US Liberals," I assumed that you meant you were somewhere other than the US. If you're just unpatriotic, I suppose I can live with that, even if I don't really like it.

Of course not, but I'm suggesting that civil disobedience is a good thing when your country decides it's going to do something that is contrary to your rights as a citizen. That's why America's Constitution added a stipulation about citizens peacefully petitioning the government for redress of wrongs. There aren't a whole lot of countries in the world that will let you do that without charging you with some kind of crime.

Unless you think a demolitions company has bunker buster bombs, you're just backtracking because you know I've caught you in your words.

But I'm willing to bet you won't take me seriously, just like every other Liberal I've debated with.

_________________

I don't think you know what hypocritical means because you keep using that word when I've never said I supported government waste. Rather I demanded that if we're being taxed our money should go to something beneficial to the citizens of this country, which does not include nation building nor being the world police.



Do you think about what you write or does this shit flow from your fingers as though they were possessed? The nation of Israel is an aberration pulled from the annals of history and plopped down in the one place on the planet where it could possibly create the most conflict. It's only good point is that it's less aggressive than the United States which backs it and would gladly just rattle swords at the Muslims around them rather than start wars with them. Putting that aside though it's also nation built and run on heavy religious influence making it no better than the nations that surround it.



We lost completely in Vietnam, it wouldn't have mattered if we'd killed every enemy combatant.



You claim to not be mad but you want to hang on technicalities, would you have preferred it if I had initially said some ridiculous gigatons of TNT?

There's only one part of that post I want to reply to at this point. Here it is:

Actually, it's many times better than the nations that surround it. Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation that doesn't ban any religions or permit its citizens to bully others to the point that the practitioners just leave for fear of their lives. The UN has reported that it's more democratic than any other nation in the Middle East. Israel's women have full freedoms to vote, serve in the Army, drive cars, and aren't buried up to their necks in ritualistic stonings when they violate Shariah Law. Can you name another Middle Eastern nation that has equal freedoms to Israel?

_________________

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe the future is here.

_________________

EPIC FAIL art thread | Updated 09/30/2009 | Rawbawtz
Vote for The Zombie Hunters now! Vote here.

This thread sucks.

I seriously don't understand Ruff's point of view at all.

_________________
Tuor: Stuff is our resident, hot mess, alcoholic.
Senel: Stuff is the patron saint of getting shitfaced. You replaced your organs with an engine that runs solely on alcohol.
RIP Lucky. I love you so much.

Some Sylvanas, too.

_________________
Tuor: Stuff is our resident, hot mess, alcoholic.
Senel: Stuff is the patron saint of getting shitfaced. You replaced your organs with an engine that runs solely on alcohol.
RIP Lucky. I love you so much.

shit that bitch is finer than a motherfucker

_________________

Inorite?

Seriously though, this conversation is the most brainwashed, uneducated shit I've ever seen in my life.

_________________
Tuor: Stuff is our resident, hot mess, alcoholic.
Senel: Stuff is the patron saint of getting shitfaced. You replaced your organs with an engine that runs solely on alcohol.
RIP Lucky. I love you so much.

_________________

I'm still the Queen of Dicks

The name of this thread should be changed to "Why RuffDraft Sucks."

Sentios sucks too.

_________________
this sig is my fanboy badge of HONOR!!!1!

inb4 necrophilia

_________________

EPIC FAIL art thread | Updated 09/30/2009 | Rawbawtz
Vote for The Zombie Hunters now! Vote here.